Well, I was going to try this with my phone, but no popcorn (guess I threw it out... it was about 15 years old, after all, lol)

My phone is Kyocera Strobe. The plastic loop at the top is the antenna. I was going to set a
couple kernels in the loop and have the girlfriend call it. Maybe my friend will have some that I can use. If it works, I'll make a vid to show you
all... if I can find someone with raw popcorn, lol... everyone I know uses microwave popcorn. I prefer the air popper, personally.

I can't really say I am suprised, but I am kinda shocked. I knew there was a reason I prefered to text, lol. I have the same fears about Wi-Fi and
home wireless networks, honestly.

Anyway, it's clearly a hoax. Just do the math, people. Popcorn pops because it's partly made of water, which you boil to make pop. It's about 13
percent water. Now assuming about 2 grams of popcorn, that's about .26 grams of water. It takes 4.18 joules to raise 1 gram of water 1 degree
Celsius. Room temperature being about 18-20 Celsius, means it will take about 87 joules to pop the corn (assuming it does so as soon as it reaches 100
Celsius, and no heat is lost to the atmosphere). In the videos, it takes about seven seconds to start popping corn. that works out to a modest bit
more than 3 watts per phone (which, I might add, is still slightly more power than any modern cellphone antenna emits. They peak at about 2W. But
it's not ludicrously out of the capability of a phone).

However, phones aren't exactly lasers. They radiate omnidirectionally. the corn kernels are receiving less than 5% of the flux. Being generous, the
phones would have to be putting out at least 62 watts, which would drain a typical cell phone 1000mWh battery in 58 seconds. (using all the battery's
power for transmitting microwaves at 100% efficiency, leaving none to run the actual phone) I assume that your phones have longer than a 1 minute talk
time?

This is, of course, all assuming perfect resonance and 100% absorption, which is ludicrous in the real world. It also assumes that only the water in
the corn is being heated, and nothing else.

It reminds me of a similar confirmed hoax from england a few years back involving two cellphones cooking an egg. I am curious as to how they did it
though, it would make for an awesome parlor trick.

This is the thing that bothers me most about ATS members and guests.
Every thread has someone who cries "HOAX!!"
Then tries to explain it away. The vids are from 3 different countries!
I am open to it being a hoax. I brought this to ATS because I trust a LOT of people here. Being the S/T section I figured that people would TRY it
before calling HOAX.

Has anyone of the people that posted they wanted to TRY it, done so?
I want to know if it is or isn't a HOAX. I don't have the resources to try it out myself. So, anyone who HAS tried it please post the results,
either

even if it is real im still using my cell phone. i smoke and drink, and drive a car and breathe and eat and hunt and fish and go out side and walk and
sleep and most of all im alive which puts me at risk of dieing every second of my life. all of which are just as deadly..

besides cell phones are cheaper than land lines. ill give up a few years of my life to save a buck or two. it will give me less time with more money..

Anyway, it's clearly a hoax. Just do the math, people. Popcorn pops because it's partly made of water, which you boil to make pop. It's about 13
percent water. Now assuming about 2 grams of popcorn, that's about .26 grams of water. It takes 4.18 joules to raise 1 gram of water 1 degree
Celsius. Room temperature being about 18-20 Celsius, means it will take about 87 joules to pop the corn (assuming it does so as soon as it reaches 100
Celsius, and no heat is lost to the atmosphere). In the videos, it takes about seven seconds to start popping corn. that works out to a modest bit
more than 3 watts per phone (which, I might add, is still slightly more power than any modern cellphone antenna emits. They peak at about 2W. But
it's not ludicrously out of the capability of a phone).

Ok, You are an idiot. I just tried this, and it worked!

Hoax eh? I can't believe you would do that without checking for yourself!

Okay, after doing a bit of research (my little engineering brain at work!) I came up with this explanation, which makes sense to me:

Cellphones operate roughly in the frequency range 0.8 to 1.9 GHz. What I learned, however, that I didn't know before, is that industrial microwave
ovens often operate at 0.915 GHz, which is in that range!

Moreover, large industrial/commercial microwave ovens operating at the common large industrial-oven microwave heating frequency of 915 MHz (0.915
GHz), also heat water and food perfectly well.

Therefore, assuming you hit the popcorn with enough power long enough, this should work just as shown, no trickery involved. Basically, you're
hitting the popcorn with the same kind of waves that a microwave uses, which is actually really scary. Now, while a microwave oven is using way more
power than a cellphone, also remember that the microwave is cooking (normally) a lot more than 3 or 4 kernels, and that the kernels are closer to the
source of the power in the case of the cellphones than in the microwave, and wave power drops off sharply with distance.

Originally posted by DragonsDemesne
Okay, after doing a bit of research (my little engineering brain at work!) I came up with this explanation, which makes sense to me:

Cellphones operate roughly in the frequency range 0.8 to 1.9 GHz. What I learned, however, that I didn't know before, is that industrial microwave
ovens often operate at 0.915 GHz, which is in that range!

Moreover, large industrial/commercial microwave ovens operating at the common large industrial-oven microwave heating frequency of 915 MHz (0.915
GHz), also heat water and food perfectly well.

Therefore, assuming you hit the popcorn with enough power long enough, this should work just as shown, no trickery involved. Basically, you're
hitting the popcorn with the same kind of waves that a microwave uses, which is actually really scary. Now, while a microwave oven is using way more
power than a cellphone, also remember that the microwave is cooking (normally) a lot more than 3 or 4 kernels, and that the kernels are closer to the
source of the power in the case of the cellphones than in the microwave, and wave power drops off sharply with distance.

/end geeky explanation

Microwaves are faraday cages made of metal which reflects microwaves. Better than 90% of the roughly 1000 watts emitted from the microwaves magnetron
end up hitting the food. In sharp contrast, less than 5 percent of the rays from your (~2watt) cellphones would be hitting the corn given the setup in
the youtube videos.

You'll also note that the frequencies chosen for microwave ovens and for microwave communications devices are specifically chosen to not be within
the optimum absorbance band of water. In communications, this is because they don't want your cellphone to cease working entirely when it's raining
outside. When it comes to food microwaves, they choose it because they don't just want to burn the outside and leave the inside cold, and because
they can afford to have the microwaves pass through thin food, because it's in a metal box, and will just bounce back around until it hits the food
anyway.

popcorn kernels are so small that they probably won't absorb all the microwaves incident on 'em.

I can tell you that it certainly doesn't work with samsung SCH-u540s and RAZRs, and I suspect Quazga of being a disinformant or troll.

On the surface of it, it seems unlikely, but I will round up a few phones and try it. Should have a control or two to validate the scientific
process too. Will check back later and report. Gotta flee to work now.

p.s. you notice all three videos have a draped table or other things that hides what is beneath? Will still try it later.

final p.s. What made it seem dubious from the start, was the speed at which the kernels popped in the videos. I wish my microwave was this
efficient.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.